<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (12) TMI 624 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184252</link>
    <description>A will is proved only when attestation complies with Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and at least one attesting witness proves due execution under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. An attesting witness must establish not only the testator&#039;s signature but also valid attestation by the other witness. Section 71 is only a limited safeguard where a summoned witness denies or cannot recollect execution; it does not excuse non-examination of an available attesting witness or cure deficient proof. On the evidence, the scribe was only a writer, not an attesting witness, and the non-examination of the other witness justified adverse inference. The will was therefore not proved, and the suit dismissal was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2016 11:51:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 624 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184252</link>
      <description>A will is proved only when attestation complies with Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and at least one attesting witness proves due execution under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. An attesting witness must establish not only the testator&#039;s signature but also valid attestation by the other witness. Section 71 is only a limited safeguard where a summoned witness denies or cannot recollect execution; it does not excuse non-examination of an available attesting witness or cure deficient proof. On the evidence, the scribe was only a writer, not an attesting witness, and the non-examination of the other witness justified adverse inference. The will was therefore not proved, and the suit dismissal was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184252</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>